Er... you mean I should give you the names of games I think I could review so that you can do it? I don't think that's really a good idea, sorry. The simple reason is that I believe 'job-reviews' can't be really good.

If you want to help, I'd greatly appreciate it - but I can't choose games for you. The best thing would be of course to have more 'different' games, i.e. cover some of the lesser represented genres of the site. That would be for example RPGs and simulations. Preferably for other systems than PC of course. But that is all I can give as suggestions.

If you want (and give me the titles you think are worth reviewing (as to prevent another homm-fiasco)) I'm more then willing to review a couple in my spare time (that is after 29 january 'cause of exams) which I normally have heaps of (except now because of the mentioned exams)... Perhaps some others on this board can help out too (wink wink nudge nudge)

I could easily name 28 games which would be worth reviewing (not necessarily good games though, it can be fun to review bad games sometimes, too ) and I wouldn't have to play at all in order to review them. It's just that the whole act of writing still takes too much time, that is why I agree that we shouldn't try reaching a number just for the sake of it.

Edited by Mr Creosote at 20:10 on December, 21st 2002

Of course you or me could start reviewing worthless games now, just in order to reach a certain number. But what's the point in reviewing games that aren't worth the trouble? (unless you have played 28 quality games you were able to review now)

28 games to go and just 67 days left. That means a new game almost every second day - impossible

Pada: you're welcome to use my oven

Mmmm, I really want cake now.

How about doing a redesign of the front page into a big birthday cake?

Tuss

I was actually more surprised by NetDanzrs assumption that only geeks frequent this board than by Tuss' interest in our love-lives... Some of us might leave them in the original package but others actually have a life

BTW: know how to bake a cake but lack an oven and the money to spend on baking a cake and throwing it away since I don't eat cake... sorry

Edited by Pada1 at 02:57 on November, 26th 2002

Oh, you did! You insinuated the "natural" place for a woman is "beside" a man, thus disregarding the lesbian way of life

Hey, I didn't discriminate against lesbians. Now lets get this topic back on-topic, eh?

Tuss

Well, statistically we should have two of them. I'd like to hear from them whether they were offended or not .

You won't get out of this that easy, Tuss: in addition to all females, you have discriminated all gay members of the forum by insinuating it's 'normal' to have girlfriends

I'm not saying it's a girls job, just none of you have ever expresed the ability to bake a cake. (Or the ability to ever learn how )

Anyway, if I had a kitchen (or anything more than one room for that matter) I'd bake one.

Tuss

Aw, if any girl would be (hypothetically) stupid enough to be attracted to a looney like the people here, she'd probably also not take offense from such ultra-conservative statements

Edited by Mr Creosote at 21:48 on November, 26th 2002

And even if anybody here -- hypothetically -- has a girlfriend, I'm sure she'd be very much offended by Tuss implying that cooking birthday cakes is a girl's job, as opposed to real cool guy stuff like, say, running abandonware sites.

No, it wasn't a 'me'. It was just an expression of an immense surprise at asking about girlfriends on a geek board like this .

Was that a 'me'?

Was that a trick question, Tuss?

How about somebody make an actual Good Old Days birthday cake, and then take a picture of it and you can post it on the site? Eh? That'd be real looney.

So, who has a looney girlfriend?

Tuss

I guess I have to search for some standard images then